Preview: The Evil Within is the new, old Resident Evil

Mikami's next game captures an old-school survival horror feel—for good and ill.

The first two or three times we were shown a hands-off demo of The Evil Within—the new survival horror title from the man who practically created the genre, Resident Evil creator Shinji Mikami—we came away distinctly unimpressed with the game's extremely slow pacing and lack of genuine thrills. So our first opportunity to actually play an early build of the game came with low expectations. And while the experience surpassed those expectations, it included enough issues for us still to be wary of the final product.

Our demo threw us right in to missions that represent the fourth and eighth chapters of the game without much context for the spooky goings-on around us. The first demo chapter started with an effort to find a doctor's missing patient, Leslie, but quickly devolved into a standard escape from the encroaching undead with little apparent storyline. The second chapter featured a number of ghostly flashbacks detailing Leslie's own lonely descent into madness and the good doctor's attempt to rein him in. Along the way, there were plenty of cheesy horror movie one-liners that fell right on the line between endearingly campy and just plain bad writing.

Right off the bat, The Evil Within is much more reminiscent of the slow, cerebral early Resident Evil games than the shooting-heavy action-fests that followed in the wake of Resident Evil 4. Ammunition is extremely scarce, and the design favors players that are able to sneak around and avoid confrontation rather than run into it. The game's undead enemies are generally the slow, shambling kind that lurch directly toward you with ample opportunity to line up a head shot, assuming you have a bullet to spare (and, ideally, a lit match to ignite the corpse and prevent it from re-animating).

Even when facing a room full of these zombies, the difficulty is in managing to kill them all without wasting too many bullets rather than actually avoiding their slow, methodical approach. There's some strategy in luring these zombies into explosive trip wires and other hazards that help do the job for you, but for the most part we were unimpressed by the slow-paced combat and choppy, staged-looking animations of the undead threats. The one exception in the demo was a horrifying spider woman hybrid, all red flailing legs with slashing spikey ends, that sets off a thrilling chase sequence down a creepy hallway.

Aside from that, the tension comes mainly from a hooded apparition named Ruvik, who seems to randomly appear just when you're beginning to feel safe. It's not that hard to run out of Ruvik's way as he marches toward you methodically with an outstretched, killer arm, but doing so often flushes you out of a hiding space or into one of the many deadly traps placed on the walls, which would be simple to disarm in calmer circumstances. The demo levels we played were extremely unforgiving, with only one or two missteps being enough to earn a trip back to a checkpoint that was saved up to ten minutes before. This makes the slightest mistake feel especially costly, and it ratchets up the stakes in even the simplest encounters.

Footage from a demo shown at last year's Tokyo Game Show.

The Evil Within also feels very reminiscent of early Resident Evil in the arcane puzzles you often have to solve to move on. One chapter in the demo took place in a big, gothic mansion (sound familiar?) and required lots of slow exploration through its cavernous rooms to unlock an intricate three-part lock for a huge vault-like door at the rear of the lobby. The find-the-pieces-of-this-key and search-for-the-secret-room-unlock-button gameplay felt either hopelessly dated or charmingly retro, depending on how you look at it and how you feel about early survival horror games these days.

Outside of the gameplay, The Evil Within cranks up the creepy factor through frequent, difficult-to-process bouts of insanity in the world around you ("We must be collectively losing our minds," the protagonist helpfully and directly explains at one point). Doors explode open with a torrent of waist-high blood, Shining-style. Horrible, toothy Sarlaac-alikes pop out of nowhere and drag you to your death unless you have the presence of mind to shoot the door-release button. At one point, during a fall down a seemingly endless corridor, the world around you suddenly fades into an orthogonal hallway, pushing you down with a screeching thud on what was a wall just a second before. Some of these surprises come off as hackneyed, but overall it creates a strong impression that you can't really believe your own senses in this world.

The game definitely isn't above the gross-out school of horror, either. In addition to the room-o'-blood discussed above, one of the main motifs in the demo was puzzles that involved electrical poking and prodding into specific areas of exposed brain on half-living cadavers with the skulls removed. Recovered audio recordings seem to revel in the screaming of these tortured subjects, alongside creepily clinical descriptions from the mad scientist who initially set up the experiments. At one point an obviously disturbed butcher starts literally tearing off pieces of his face because of an overbearing itchiness. Both zombie and player deaths are rendered with a maximum amount of grisliness, reminiscent of The Last of Us (it was a bit much for me, personally).

It all adds up to a game that's much more intense to play than previous hands-off demos led us to believe, but it's also a game with some downright dated gameplay choices that still feels quite rough around the edges. With the release date on the PS3, PS4, Xbox One, Xbox 360, and Windows just pushed back to later October (just in time for Halloween), hopefully the developers will have enough time to refine this into a seamless, taut survival horror experience.

Kyle Orland
Kyle is the Senior Gaming Editor at Ars Technica, specializing in video game hardware and software. He has journalism and computer science degrees from University of Maryland. He is based in the Washington, DC area. Emailkyle.orland@arstechnica.com//Twitter@KyleOrl

I've never actually played much Resident Evil and I've never been interested in survival horror, but I can definitely respect a developer who is willing to attempt an old-school type of game these days. Hopefully old-school Resident Evil fans will be happy with it.

Here's hoping more developers will bring back some old-school style of games. I'd be ecstatic if Nintendo would release some new Mario, Zelda, and Metroid (2D!) games in the classic style, like Capcom did with Mega Man 9 and 10.

If it's anything like the later bad ports of the console versions of the games with the in game popups telling to "Hit ALT+A Now to dodge!" or some such similar crap, then I'll pass. Got burned one too many times by their crappy console ports.

I've never actually played much Resident Evil and I've never been interested in survival horror, but I can definitely respect a developer who is willing to attempt an old-school type of game these days. Hopefully old-school Resident Evil fans will be happy with it.

Here's hoping more developers will bring back some old-school style of games. I'd be ecstatic if Nintendo would release some new Mario, Zelda, and Metroid (2D!) games in the classic style, like Capcom did with Mega Man 9 and 10.

I was wondering when they'd ever make an actual Resident Evil game again, so your (valid) criticisms actually make me more interested in the game than I was previously.

It's just really refreshing when a game designer is willing to include design elements that they know won't appeal to some people. These days it seems like it takes a lot of courage to say "I know some people will hate this game but that's ok".

When the reviews of a game are highly polarized, I also feel a lot more interested. There's a good chance that the design choices that make the game unplayable to some will make it far more enjoyable for others.

Dwarf Fortress is the prime example to me, with its hardcore rabid fanbase (myself included) but decidedly not "mainstream".

I've never actually played much Resident Evil and I've never been interested in survival horror, but I can definitely respect a developer who is willing to attempt an old-school type of game these days. Hopefully old-school Resident Evil fans will be happy with it.

Personally, I've found the best Resident Evil games to be the Wii-versions. RE is just the type of game that should be done as an actual shooter, using a light-gun. Really wish there were more of those out there ... (Dead Space is another great light-gun game.)

The game's undead enemies are generally the slow, shambling kind that lurch directly toward you with ample opportunity to line up a head shot, assuming you have a bullet to spare (and, ideally, a lit match to ignite the corpse and prevent it from re-animating).

I'm hoping you don't mean we can expect the re-introduction of crimson zombie bullshit to the series. Love the original RE (especially the remake), but having to ferry gasoline all the time got old. Not to mention that crimsons were just annoying as hell.

I think it looks quite nice. If its not a shooter the better. If you have enemies like nemesis it would make the game a lot better.4 was good, but i still like the very first the best. Lots of puzzles, great monsters and effects (thinking of the dogs) and better once you thought you were done it went further.So old school approach is a welcome to me.

Ammunition is extremely scarce, and the design favors players that are able to sneak around and avoid confrontation rather than run into it.

Because The Last of Us.

Quote:

The demo levels we played were extremely unforgiving, with only one or two missteps being enough to earn a trip back to a checkpoint that was saved up to ten minutes before.

Because Dark Souls.

Quote:

but overall it creates a strong impression that you can't really believe your own senses in this world.

And a dash of Eternal Darkness.

I am guessing "no" would be your answer to the following question based on your third comparison, but "yes" based on the first two: Did you just start gaming half way through the last (360/ps3) console generation?

Ammunition is extremely scarce, and the design favors players that are able to sneak around and avoid confrontation rather than run into it.

Because The Last of Us.

Quote:

The demo levels we played were extremely unforgiving, with only one or two missteps being enough to earn a trip back to a checkpoint that was saved up to ten minutes before.

Because Dark Souls.

Quote:

but overall it creates a strong impression that you can't really believe your own senses in this world.

And a dash of Eternal Darkness.

I am guessing "no" would be your answer to the following question based on your third comparison, but "yes" based on the first two: Did you just start gaming half way through the last (360/ps3) console generation?

you forget, the kids know about all kinds of horror games thanks to pewdiepie and his ilk.

Ammunition is extremely scarce, and the design favors players that are able to sneak around and avoid confrontation rather than run into it.

Because The Last of Us.

Quote:

The demo levels we played were extremely unforgiving, with only one or two missteps being enough to earn a trip back to a checkpoint that was saved up to ten minutes before.

Because Dark Souls.

Quote:

but overall it creates a strong impression that you can't really believe your own senses in this world.

And a dash of Eternal Darkness.

These are hallmarks of the survival horror genre, implemented by the guy who pioneered the genre. Don't mistake them for a trendy ripoff; this isn't Crapcom any more.

Edit: HOWEVER: The "one or two missteps being enough to earn a trip back to a checkpoint" had BETTER GODDAMN NOT BE INSTANT-DEATH-ON-FAILURE QUICKTIME EVENTS

This. If you fail and die it should be because you decided you'd try to turtle in a corner against twenty zombies with fifteen rounds left, not because something jumped out and your E key gave out at the wrong moment, thirty mashes in.

Personally I love extreme, nasty gore like this. I don't want to die because I don't want to observe the dude put an axe in my back (though simultaneously I kinda like it - I got a strange sensation when I died to chainsaw zombies in RE5 and <spoiler>).

I haven't played games in ages. And the only two games that weren't either sports or driving games that I ever played were "Tomb Raider" and "Resident Evil."

I only played the early RE games, but what I liked about them is that they were creepy. You'd be wandering around, there'd be weird sounds. Then the dogs. Those games were creepy as heck. Playing them in the dark, in the middle of the night was lots of fun.

Resident Evil 1 to 3 were good, decent games. Everything after that was crap.

Sparse checkpoints?Unforgiving?

Meh, I think I'll pass. I play for fun, not for frustration.

I like unforgiving. That's why I play MOBAs, even though I suck at PvP. But I think, so long as it's a learning experience, like in Dark Souls 2, that that's a good thing. This 'dudebro mindless simpleton' BS is, IMO, a huge issue.

I still remember the first ever time the zombie dogs jumped through the windows in the first game just after entering the mansion. Good times, that game was an all time classic. I think we gamers just had more patience then.

I for one miss the ps1/n64 RE days and have not been entertained with the newer titles. I don't need a mindless COD style shoot at zombie hoard game, it ruins the aesthetic of the game and desensitizes you to zombies so that when you see one it's no big deal. Walking around the mansion and reading the notes gave a much scarier vibe than having to deal with a zombie hoard and then when you did see one in the hallway or some zombie dogs blasting through the windows it was much more intense. I welcome this change, less zombies and shooting and more creepy exploration.

"but it's also a game with some downright dated gameplay choices that still feels quite rough around the edges. With the release date on the PS3, PS4, Xbox One, Xbox 360, and Windows just pushed back to later October (just in time for Halloween), hopefully the developers will have enough time to refine this into a seamless, taut survival horror experience."

Can we get a preview on this game from someone who appreciates the genre? And by "the genre" I mean survival horror -- not wannabe Hollywood action film?

I definitely think RE peaked with RE2 however 3 was pretty sweet as well. I thought anything past 4 was a totally different game and the thrill was gone. The puzzles were awesome and actually made the game so much better than another mindless shooter which is unfortunately what the series has become today. Looking forward to this game. Hope they release it for PC. (Linux would be nice.)

Just from watching the demo, it looks like a slower-paced RE4. Won't judge on the framerate issues, since that could be from being an early/unrefined build. The textures do look a little on the PS3/X360 side though, maybe with better lighting. I don't think graphics are the priority 1 in a game, but it is supposed to be a next-gen console.

I've become a bit jaded by all of the quicktime events in a game as well. I grew an even stronger aversion to them after playing the latest Tomb Raider.... it felt like half the game was DDR with an action movie playing in the background. I'd say most of my deaths in RE4 were from quicktime events.

Resident Evil 1 to 3 were good, decent games. Everything after that was crap.

Sparse checkpoints?Unforgiving?

Meh, I think I'll pass. I play for fun, not for frustration.

I like unforgiving. That's why I play MOBAs, even though I suck at PvP. But I think, so long as it's a learning experience, like in Dark Souls 2, that that's a good thing. This 'dudebro mindless simpleton' BS is, IMO, a huge issue.

A thought came to my mind reading this article: what make a game fun when it's got sparse checkpoints and high difficulty, vs frustrating?

Thinking back on the games that were in the first category, I feel like the biggest difference is predictability. If a game doesn't save for a long time, and requires flawless execution, but allows me to learn what I need to do, because the enemies move predictably, it's still fun. IF the enemies are random, then it just feels cheap.